Ethnographic Arms & Armour - View Single Post

Jim McDougall · 28th September 2008, 07:52 PM

Since we are talking about the 'deterioration' of the grips, if I understand correctly, and not necessarily metal hilt structure, it would seem that the situation would be considerably qualified by the grip material, age, and conditions to which it has been exposed.

I have seen kampilan's from the Philippines that typically have a cloth tied around the hilt, presumably to wipe the grips as required. The very nature of hilts and the grips is to maintain steady hold and avoid slippage from the effects to be expected in battle, whether sweat or blood exposure or both.

I would think that metal grips would experience the same effects as the blade with exposure to acidic body fluids, while wood, horn and ivory being more highly porous would naturally be more affected. I cannot really say much on the forensic effects on grip materials if left unattended, but imagine over time would enhance deterioration, especially in exposure to the elements.

I have seen 17th century grips on a walloon type cavalry sword, which were wood, the wire wrap long gone, but turks heads still loosely attached. It was of course wood, and fully intact, though almost sponge like with worm holes. It would seem the sword had been static for a very long time, and clearly not handled, but also clearly in a place not exposed to the elements, probably stored away. I suppose that would best illustrate the properties of 'normal' decomposition of a wood hilt.
The question would be, what if blood had existed on the hilt.

In an interesting discussion on how long blood stains would remain on weapons' blades on our other forum, I noted a New York Times article ("Stains on Prehistoric Tool are Human Blood", John Noble Wilford) where a 100,000 year old stone cutting tool found in the 1970's at a site known as Barda Balka in Iraq, had stains that testing revealed were human blood stains, possibly Neanderthal.

Obviously stone is not a grip or hilt component technically (OK I know in India etc. there are Jade hilts and so on) but clearly blood has little effect on it over time as a corrosive material.

Now that I have presented all this forensic 'evidence' , it still doesnt answer the question properly, but I have to ask Celtan one thing.......that Japanese blade isn't signed 'Muramasa' is it?

All best regards,
Jim

28th September 2008, 07:52 PM	#6
Jim McDougall Arms Historian Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Route 66 Posts: 10,191	Since we are talking about the 'deterioration' of the grips, if I understand correctly, and not necessarily metal hilt structure, it would seem that the situation would be considerably qualified by the grip material, age, and conditions to which it has been exposed. I have seen kampilan's from the Philippines that typically have a cloth tied around the hilt, presumably to wipe the grips as required. The very nature of hilts and the grips is to maintain steady hold and avoid slippage from the effects to be expected in battle, whether sweat or blood exposure or both. I would think that metal grips would experience the same effects as the blade with exposure to acidic body fluids, while wood, horn and ivory being more highly porous would naturally be more affected. I cannot really say much on the forensic effects on grip materials if left unattended, but imagine over time would enhance deterioration, especially in exposure to the elements. I have seen 17th century grips on a walloon type cavalry sword, which were wood, the wire wrap long gone, but turks heads still loosely attached. It was of course wood, and fully intact, though almost sponge like with worm holes. It would seem the sword had been static for a very long time, and clearly not handled, but also clearly in a place not exposed to the elements, probably stored away. I suppose that would best illustrate the properties of 'normal' decomposition of a wood hilt. The question would be, what if blood had existed on the hilt. In an interesting discussion on how long blood stains would remain on weapons' blades on our other forum, I noted a New York Times article ("Stains on Prehistoric Tool are Human Blood", John Noble Wilford) where a 100,000 year old stone cutting tool found in the 1970's at a site known as Barda Balka in Iraq, had stains that testing revealed were human blood stains, possibly Neanderthal. Obviously stone is not a grip or hilt component technically (OK I know in India etc. there are Jade hilts and so on) but clearly blood has little effect on it over time as a corrosive material. Now that I have presented all this forensic 'evidence' , it still doesnt answer the question properly, but I have to ask Celtan one thing.......that Japanese blade isn't signed 'Muramasa' is it? All best regards, Jim